The UK’s skills system has an age problem
Skills policy is often framed as an investment in the future. But too often, that imagined future focuses just on those entering the labour market, overlooking the fact that millions of adults will spend their lives navigating changing jobs, caring responsibilities, ill-health and economic uncertainty.
For people over 50, skills are not simply about career progression; they are about resilience. They can mean the difference between remaining in work or leaving it. As the government develops its plans around the future of work and skills, it has an opportunity to recognise that learning throughout life is essential not just to building a more productive economy, but to helping people remain financially secure as they approach later life.
Today's system often fails the very people who could benefit most, and opportunities to build new skills become less common with age. Older employees are less likely to be offered, and then to take up, training. While government-funded learning has begun to recover following the pandemic, the Adult Participation in Learning Survey showed that adults aged 50 and over still account for fewer than one in five learners, despite making up one in three of the workforce.
There are many people over 50 in lower-paid or insecure work, where access to training has long been limited. Others have spent years in physically demanding jobs that become harder to sustain with age. Some leave work unexpectedly because of caring responsibilities, health conditions, or redundancy. These events can fundamentally change someone's relationship with work, often requiring new skills to find work.
Despite this, support to retrain later in life remains fragmented and difficult to navigate. Too much provision assumes people already know what courses exist, understand eligibility rules and have the confidence to engage with formal learning. For someone who has not entered a classroom in years, who may lack digital confidence or who is juggling work and caring responsibilities, these assumptions mean we risk having more and more people disengaged from support.
Practical barriers prevent participation. Course schedules often conflict with work or caring commitments. Travel costs can make attendance unaffordable. Digital-only delivery excludes some learners, while face-to-face provision has become increasingly limited in many communities. Support available through employment, skills and careers services is rarely designed with the needs of older adults in mind and is often only marketed towards younger people, even when it is supposedly available to all.
The consequences of missing out become more significant with age. Someone made redundant in their 50s is likely to spend longer out of work than someone younger. Leaving the labour market several years before retirement can have a lasting impact on income, pensions and health, particularly as the state pension age rises and the cost-of-living increases. This can obviously have a very detrimental impact on individuals, but it is also bad news for a government that wishes to increase growth and reduce its welfare costs.
The current system also needs to focus on both qualifications and transitions. Many people experiencing a “mid-life shock” do not need a lengthy qualification. Instead, they would be better served with targeted support to refresh digital skills, improve confidence, gain sector-specific knowledge or translate decades of experience into new roles. Others may need help combining health support, careers advice and training in a way that reflects the realities of later working life. This is an obvious opportunity for the further development of Mid-life Reviews, both those delivered by employers and by Jobcentres.
There is a persistent and harmful assumption that we don’t need to invest in the skills of people over 50. But with an ageing population and employers struggling to fill vacancies across many sectors, supporting people to remain in work for longer is both an economic and societal necessity.
Skills policy should recognise that careers are becoming longer and less linear. People are increasingly likely to change occupations several times during their working lives. A system designed around a single period of education followed by decades of uninterrupted employment does not reflect reality and is not fit-for-purpose.
A genuinely lifelong learning system would look different. It would proactively reach people experiencing redundancy, ill-health or caring responsibilities before they drift out of work altogether. It would integrate careers guidance, employment support and skills provision rather than expecting individuals to navigate separate services. It would offer flexible learning that fits around people's lives, not the other way around. And it would recognise the value of existing skills and experience.
If we are serious about building a more productive, inclusive economy, then making skills accessible, relevant and achievable for people in their 50s and beyond should not be viewed as an afterthought; it should be a central part of the solution.
Elaine Smith is Head of Employment, Skills and Practice at the Centre for Ageing Better. Elaine oversees Ageing Better projects and influencing to improve the quality and accessibility of employment and skills support for people aged 50 and over. Elaine also leads on Ageing Better work with local government, developing ways to support the improvement of employment services and sharing insights at a regional level. Elaine has held various roles in employment and skills across the public, private and voluntary and community sectors. She is experienced in delivering support programmes, designing provision for marginalised groups and in building partnerships to help shape services.
